比特幣目前高調的形式不可能是貨幣

關於先前的斷言，它絕不應該被視為對更廣泛的加密貨幣或私人資金的打擊。

Bitcoin, in its current incarnation, cannot be considered money. This statement is not intended to disparage cryptocurrencies or private money in general. Evidence for this claim can be found in my 2022 book The Money Confusion: How Illiteracy About Currencies and Inflation Sets the Stage for the Crypto Revolution.

比特幣目前的形態不能被視為貨幣。此聲明無意貶低加密貨幣或一般私人資金。這說法的證據可以在我 2022 年出版的書《貨幣混亂：對貨幣和通貨膨脹的文盲如何為加密革命奠定基礎》中找到。

I believe that cryptocurrencies can – and should – replace government money precisely because governments have always devalued their currencies. Seriously, what could be more high-profile than devaluation? Few actions by a government are more visible than the devaluations that governments have consistently imposed on us because government money (e.g., dollars, pounds, euros, yen) is what we earn in exchange for our labor.

我相信加密貨幣可以而且應該取代政府貨幣，因為政府一直在貶值本國貨幣。說真的，還有什麼比貶值更引人注目的呢？在政府的行動中，沒有什麼比政府持續強加給我們的貨幣貶值更引人注目的了，因為政府的貨幣（例如美元、英鎊、歐元、日圓）是我們用勞動換取的。

Devaluation allows governments to essentially steal the fruits of our labor by reducing the exchangeable value of the money that individuals receive in exchange for their work. This serves as a reminder that despite economists' claims, inflation is not a “stealth tax.” Inflation is blatant. We quickly become aware of the bitter consequences of theft.

貨幣貶值使政府能夠透過降低個人以工作換取的貨幣的可交換價值來竊取我們的勞動成果。這提醒我們，儘管經濟學家聲稱，通貨膨脹並不是一種「隱形稅」。通貨膨脹是明目張膽的。我們很快就意識到盜竊的嚴重後果。

The challenge now is that private money forms of crypto have yet to differentiate themselves from government money. Consider once again the most well-known cryptocurrency, bitcoin.

現在的挑戰是，私人貨幣形式的加密貨幣尚未與政府貨幣區分開來。再考慮一下最著名的加密貨幣——比特幣。

If you're reading this opinion piece, you either already own bitcoin, have owned it in the past, or have spent the last week, in particular, wishing you owned it. But that's not surprising. With the coin having surged past $90,000 apiece, many of you are lamenting not buying the coin a year ($36,000), two years ($16,000), five years ($8,000), eight years ($735), and fifteen years ago when thousands of bitcoins were traded for two PapaJohn's pizzas.

如果您正在閱讀這篇評論文章，那麼您要么已經擁有比特幣，要么過去擁有它，要么在過去一周特別希望自己擁有它。但這並不奇怪。隨著比特幣價格飆升至每枚90,000 美元以上，許多人都在感嘆沒有在一年（36,000 美元）、兩年（16,000 美元）、五年（8,000 美元）、八年（735 美元）和15 年前購買比特幣，當時成千上萬的比特幣被交易了兩個棒約翰披薩。

For the sake of argument, let's disregard the numerous ups and downs that bitcoin has experienced on its path to where it is today. That's precisely what owners and proponents of the coin want us to do. With bitcoin on a tear, it's only natural for those who held on or those who simply believe to agree wholeheartedly with the popular notion that bitcoin's surge is only in its early days. That's what Michael Saylor, the most prominent bitcoin proponent and owner, is asserting.

為了方便討論，我們先忽略比特幣在發展到今天的過程中所經歷的無數起起落落。這正是代幣的所有者和支持者希望我們做的事情。隨著比特幣的快速發展，對於那些堅持持有的人或那些僅僅相信比特幣的人來說，全心全意地同意比特幣的飆升只是處於早期階段的流行觀念是很自然的。這是最著名的比特幣支持者和所有者 Michael Saylor 所斷言的。

Google's Gmail Decision—Why You Need A New Email Address

Google 的 Gmail 決定 - 為什麼您需要新的電子郵件地址

Gmail Alert—Leak Reveals New Email Addresses Coming For 2.5 Billion Users

Gmail 警報 — 洩漏的資訊顯示 25 億用戶將使用新電子郵件地址

7 World Champions React To Jon Jones Vs. Stipe Miocic Results

7 名世界冠軍對喬恩瓊斯對陣喬恩瓊斯的反應斯蒂普·米奧西奇結果

Ok, but if you agree with the present narrative that bitcoin's surge is of the early days variety then you're by definition accepting what’s similarly true, that bitcoin will never be money. Think about it.

好吧，但如果你同意目前的說法，即比特幣的飆升是早期的變化，那麼你從定義上就接受了類似的事實，即比特幣永遠不會成為貨幣。想一想。

The sole use of money is as a medium of exchange. No one buys, sells, lends or borrows with money. More realistically production always buys production, and production is always loaned in return for future production. Money is just the reasonably trusted store of value that moves production between buyer, seller, lender, and borrower. If the latter is true, and it is, how can bitcoin ever be money? More specifically, what bitcoin cheerleader would ever buy, sell, lend or borrow in an alleged exchange medium that is only going up?

貨幣的唯一用途是作為交換媒介。沒有人用金錢購買、出售、借貸。更現實的是，生產總是購買生產，而生產總是藉出以換取未來的生產。貨幣只是一種合理可信的價值儲存手段，它在買方、賣方、貸款人和借款人之間轉移生產。如果後者是真的，而且確實如此，那麼比特幣怎麼能成為貨幣呢？更具體地說，哪個比特幣啦啦隊長會在所謂的只會上漲的交易媒介上買賣、借出或借入？

It’s just a gentle reminder that if bitcoin is what its proponents want it to be (up, up, and up) then it can only be an exchange medium insofar as those purchasing with it suffer inflation in reverse as the value of goods purchased in return for the coin relentlessly shrink in value relative to the coin itself. In other words, bitcoin's alleged feature is its bug. And then this alleged feature imagines that there's such thing as a speculation that only goes up.

這只是一個溫和的提醒，如果比特幣是它的支持者所希望的那樣（上漲、上漲、上漲），那麼它只能是一種交換媒介，因為用它購買的人會遭受通貨膨脹，而作為回報，購買的商品的價值會增加。換句話說，比特幣所謂的功能就是它的缺陷。然後這個所謂的功能想像有一種只會上升的投機行為。

Oh well, even proponents of the constant that is gold (it only moves up when fiat currencies in which it’s priced are going down - a real inflation hedge) don’t think the above about the yellow metal. They know well that persistently devaluing governments sometimes go the other way. What will keep bitcoin afloat once its alleged purpose is discredited by the very “feature” that proponents claim will have it on an upward path forever?

哦，好吧，即使是黃金這個常數的支持者（只有當其定價的法定貨幣下跌時，黃金才會上漲——真正的通膨對沖）也不認為上述關於黃金的情況。他們深知，持續貶值政府有時會適得其反。一旦其所謂的目的被支持者聲稱將使其永遠走上上昇道路的「功能」所質疑，那麼什麼才能讓比特幣繼續存在？